Leaving China to avoid tariffs? Look before you leap
The costs and complexity of shifting sourcing to another country can potentially outweigh any tariff savings, said speakers at a recent trade and transportation conference.
Contributing Editor Toby Gooley is a freelance writer and editor specializing in supply chain, logistics, material handling, and international trade. She previously was Editor at CSCMP's Supply Chain Quarterly. and Senior Editor of SCQ's sister publication, DC VELOCITY. Prior to joining AGiLE Business Media in 2007, she spent 20 years at Logistics Management magazine as Managing Editor and Senior Editor covering international trade and transportation. Prior to that she was an export traffic manager for 10 years. She holds a B.A. in Asian Studies from Cornell University.
The Trump Administration's higher tariffs on U.S. imports from China have accelerated a trend that began several years ago: U.S. companies are shifting some sourcing from China to other, typically lower-cost countries in Southeast and South Asia, as well as sub-Saharan Africa, Eastern Europe, and the Western Hemisphere. But the consequences and costs of relocating can potentially outweigh any savings from avoiding the tariffs, cautioned panelists at the recent 18th Annual Northeast Cargo Symposium hosted by the Coalition of New England Companies for Trade (CONECT) in Providence, R.I. Any importer contemplating such a move should be realistic about the pros and cons of leaving China, they said.
Manufacturers often rely on local suppliers for an array of materials, parts, and components, so relocating production may require finding new suppliers that meet quality standards and can take on more business on a specified timetable. But those suppliers may not always be available when and where you want them, said Jack Daniels, president and CEO of EastBridge Strategic Sourcing, a consulting firm that helps U.S. companies manage overseas sourcing and production. He told of one company that moved production of one of its products from China to Myanmar. "The tariffs disappeared," he said, but for several reasons some specialized parts still had to be sourced in China, which added time and complexity. Additionally, there were no direct ship calls from Myanmar to the company's U.S. destination, so the product had to ship via Singapore, which also added time and cost.
Daniels said that so far, only a few of his clients, many of which are in the electronics industry, have moved any production out of China. That's partly because these contract manufacturers depend on multiple suppliers of numerous small parts, and it's "too painful to move all of that at this point," he said. About 85% of the world's printed circuit boards are made in China now, and it will be "years and years before the entire ecosystem of manufacturers and suppliers can shift out of China—if it ever does," he added.
Some other types of products are starting to leave China, though. Ocean carriers are responding to increased demand for service from Vietnam and other Southeast Asian countries and have started to offer more direct calls and transshipments in the region, said Sri Laxmana, vice president, global ocean services for third-party logistics (3PL) provider C.H. Robinson. Ocean shipping, however, is a "very asset-heavy industry," so carriers must be certain there will be sufficient inbound and outbound volume to justify the additional costs and transit time, he said. They must get commitments from ports, container terminals, and local labor, yet in developing economies, transportation and logistics infrastructure and services may not be adequate or reliable enough to handle the additional demand. That can lead to delays and capacity shortages, he said.
Careful research needed
One company that's adjusting its sourcing strategy in response to tariffs is Manchester, Conn.-based Bob's Discount Furniture. Last fall, Bob's moved about 25% to 30% of its business from China to factories in Vietnam, some of which are owned by its existing Chinese suppliers. The company also has been increasing its sourcing from India and Indonesia, said Amy Elmore, director of international logistics.
Elmore outlined some of the steps she and her team have taken to keep the cost and service impact associated with sourcing shifts under control. They included:
Negotiating new product pricing to mitigate the cost of additional tariffs.
Having "people on the ground" to onboard new vendors and make sure everything from raw materials to logistics goes smoothly.
Assessing logistics infrastructure and services in terms of capacity, availability, and reliability.
Accurately quantifying how much volume would be produced in the new locations. This was helpful when negotiating pricing and service with ocean carriers and consolidators, Elmore said.
Adjusting internal lead times to account for the more frequent delays in loading containers at new ports and the longer transit times to U.S destinations.
Elmore said that anyone who is thinking about relocating production should consider taking similar steps. In addition, she recommended that importers think about the end-to-end supply chain, and not just the international segment. It's important to know, she said, "if you have to change your routing, will it impact your domestic costs, distribution, and transit times?"
ReposiTrak, a global food traceability network operator, will partner with Upshop, a provider of store operations technology for food retailers, to create an end-to-end grocery traceability solution that reaches from the supply chain to the retail store, the firms said today.
The partnership creates a data connection between suppliers and the retail store. It works by integrating Salt Lake City-based ReposiTrak’s network of thousands of suppliers and their traceability shipment data with Austin, Texas-based Upshop’s network of more than 450 retailers and their retail stores.
That accomplishment is important because it will allow food sector trading partners to meet the U.S. FDA’s Food Safety Modernization Act Section 204d (FSMA 204) requirements that they must create and store complete traceability records for certain foods.
And according to ReposiTrak and Upshop, the traceability solution may also unlock potential business benefits. It could do that by creating margin and growth opportunities in stores by connecting supply chain data with store data, thus allowing users to optimize inventory, labor, and customer experience management automation.
"Traceability requires data from the supply chain and – importantly – confirmation at the retail store that the proper and accurate lot code data from each shipment has been captured when the product is received. The missing piece for us has been the supply chain data. ReposiTrak is the leader in capturing and managing supply chain data, starting at the suppliers. Together, we can deliver a single, comprehensive traceability solution," Mark Hawthorne, chief innovation and strategy officer at Upshop, said in a release.
"Once the data is flowing the benefits are compounding. Traceability data can be used to improve food safety, reduce invoice discrepancies, and identify ways to reduce waste and improve efficiencies throughout the store,” Hawthorne said.
Under FSMA 204, retailers are required by law to track Key Data Elements (KDEs) to the store-level for every shipment containing high-risk food items from the Food Traceability List (FTL). ReposiTrak and Upshop say that major industry retailers have made public commitments to traceability, announcing programs that require more traceability data for all food product on a faster timeline. The efforts of those retailers have activated the industry, motivating others to institute traceability programs now, ahead of the FDA’s enforcement deadline of January 20, 2026.
Inclusive procurement practices can fuel economic growth and create jobs worldwide through increased partnerships with small and diverse suppliers, according to a study from the Illinois firm Supplier.io.
The firm’s “2024 Supplier Diversity Economic Impact Report” found that $168 billion spent directly with those suppliers generated a total economic impact of $303 billion. That analysis can help supplier diversity managers and chief procurement officers implement programs that grow diversity spend, improve supply chain competitiveness, and increase brand value, the firm said.
The companies featured in Supplier.io’s report collectively supported more than 710,000 direct jobs and contributed $60 billion in direct wages through their investments in small and diverse suppliers. According to the analysis, those purchases created a ripple effect, supporting over 1.4 million jobs and driving $105 billion in total income when factoring in direct, indirect, and induced economic impacts.
“At Supplier.io, we believe that empowering businesses with advanced supplier intelligence not only enhances their operational resilience but also significantly mitigates risks,” Aylin Basom, CEO of Supplier.io, said in a release. “Our platform provides critical insights that drive efficiency and innovation, enabling companies to find and invest in small and diverse suppliers. This approach helps build stronger, more reliable supply chains.”
Logistics industry growth slowed in December due to a seasonal wind-down of inventory and following one of the busiest holiday shopping seasons on record, according to the latest Logistics Managers’ Index (LMI) report, released this week.
The monthly LMI was 57.3 in December, down more than a percentage point from November’s reading of 58.4. Despite the slowdown, economic activity across the industry continued to expand, as an LMI reading above 50 indicates growth and a reading below 50 indicates contraction.
The LMI researchers said the monthly conditions were largely due to seasonal drawdowns in inventory levels—and the associated costs of holding them—at the retail level. The LMI’s Inventory Levels index registered 50, falling from 56.1 in November. That reduction also affected warehousing capacity, which slowed but remained in expansion mode: The LMI’s warehousing capacity index fell 7 points to a reading of 61.6.
December’s results reflect a continued trend toward more typical industry growth patterns following recent years of volatility—and they point to a successful peak holiday season as well.
“Retailers were clearly correct in their bet to stock [up] on goods ahead of the holiday season,” the LMI researchers wrote in their monthly report. “Holiday sales from November until Christmas Eve were up 3.8% year-over-year according to Mastercard. This was largely driven by a 6.7% increase in e-commerce sales, although in-person spending was up 2.9% as well.”
And those results came during a compressed peak shopping cycle.
“The increase in spending came despite the shorter holiday season due to the late Thanksgiving,” the researchers also wrote, citing National Retail Federation (NRF) estimates that U.S. shoppers spent just short of a trillion dollars in November and December, making it the busiest holiday season of all time.
The LMI is a monthly survey of logistics managers from across the country. It tracks industry growth overall and across eight areas: inventory levels and costs; warehousing capacity, utilization, and prices; and transportation capacity, utilization, and prices. The report is released monthly by researchers from Arizona State University, Colorado State University, Rochester Institute of Technology, Rutgers University, and the University of Nevada, Reno, in conjunction with the Council of Supply Chain Management Professionals (CSCMP).
As U.S. small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) face an uncertain business landscape in 2025, a substantial majority (67%) expect positive growth in the new year compared to 2024, according to a survey from DHL.
However, the survey also showed that businesses could face a rocky road to reach that goal, as they navigate a complex environment of regulatory/policy shifts and global market volatility. Both those issues were cited as top challenges by 36% of respondents, followed by staffing/talent retention (11%) and digital threats and cyber attacks (2%).
Against that backdrop, SMEs said that the biggest opportunity for growth in 2025 lies in expanding into new markets (40%), followed by economic improvements (31%) and implementing new technologies (14%).
As the U.S. prepares for a broad shift in political leadership in Washington after a contentious election, the SMEs in DHL’s survey were likely split evenly on their opinion about the impact of regulatory and policy changes. A plurality of 40% were on the fence (uncertain, still evaluating), followed by 24% who believe regulatory changes could negatively impact growth, 20% who see these changes as having a positive impact, and 16% predicting no impact on growth at all.
That uncertainty also triggered a split when respondents were asked how they planned to adjust their strategy in 2025 in response to changes in the policy or regulatory landscape. The largest portion (38%) of SMEs said they remained uncertain or still evaluating, followed by 30% who will make minor adjustments, 19% will maintain their current approach, and 13% who were willing to significantly adjust their approach.
Specifically, the two sides remain at odds over provisions related to the deployment of semi-automated technologies like rail-mounted gantry cranes, according to an analysis by the Kansas-based 3PL Noatum Logistics. The ILA has strongly opposed further automation, arguing it threatens dockworker protections, while the USMX contends that automation enhances productivity and can create long-term opportunities for labor.
In fact, U.S. importers are already taking action to prevent the impact of such a strike, “pulling forward” their container shipments by rushing imports to earlier dates on the calendar, according to analysis by supply chain visibility provider Project44. That strategy can help companies to build enough safety stock to dampen the damage of events like the strike and like the steep tariffs being threatened by the incoming Trump administration.
Likewise, some ocean carriers have already instituted January surcharges in pre-emption of possible labor action, which could support inbound ocean rates if a strike occurs, according to freight market analysts with TD Cowen. In the meantime, the outcome of the new negotiations are seen with “significant uncertainty,” due to the contentious history of the discussion and to the timing of the talks that overlap with a transition between two White House regimes, analysts said.